Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee [sunset review]

Speaker Weiers
Arizona House of Representatives
House Majority Research
MEMORANDUM
Kathi Knox
Deputy Director of Research
Legislative Research Analyst,
Natural Resources andAgriculture Committee
To: JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007-2848
Office (602) 926-5480
FAX (602) 417-3134
Re: Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee
Date: September 20,2006
Attached is the final report of the sunset review of the Grazing Best Management
Practices Advisory Committee, which was conducted by the House of Representatives Natural
Resources and Agriculture and Senate Natural Resources and Rural Affairs Committee of
Reference on September 1, 2006.
This report has been distributed to the following individuals and agencies:
Governor of the State of Arizona
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
President of the Senate
Senator Ken Bennett
Senate Members
Senator Jake Flake, Cochair
Senator Marsha Arzberger
Senator Timothy S. Bee
Senator Robert Blendu
Senator Robert Cannell
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Representative Jim Weiers
House Members
Representative Russ Jones, Cochair
Representative Cheryl Chase
Representative Ann Kirkpatrick
Representative Tom O'Halleran
Representative Kyrsten Sinema
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
Department of Library, Archives & Public Records
Auditor General
Senate Republican Staff
Senate Research Staff
Senate Democratic Staff
Senate Resource Center
House Majority Staff
House Research Staff
House Democratic Staff
Chief Clerk
September 20, 2006
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE REPORT:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Background
Pursuant to Section 41-2953, Arizona Revised Statutes, the Joint Legislative Audit
Committee (JLAC) assigned the sunset review of the Grazing Best Management Practices
Advisory Committee to the Senate Natural Resources and Rural Affairs and the House of
Representatives Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee of Reference.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee was established by the
Legislature in 1997 to develop and recommend voluntary best management practices for
discharges to navigable streams. Recommendations are to be made to the Director of the
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). The Legislature charged the committee
with periodically re-examining, evaluating and proposing modifications to grazing best
management practices.
Committee ofReference Sunset Review Procedures
The Committee of Reference held a public hearing on September 1, 2006, to review the
ADEQ response to the sunset factors as required by A.R.S § 41-2954, subsections D and F, and
to receive public testimony (See Attachment 4). Testimony was received from Jim Buster,
ADEQ legislative liaison; Shelly Tunis, Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association; Rick Lavis, Arizona
Cottongrowers' Association; and Bas Aja, Arizona Cattlemen's Association.
Committee ofReference Recommendations
The Committee of Reference recommended that the Grazing Best Management
Practices Advisory Committee be combined with the Agricultural Best Management
Advisory Committee for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) and be
continued for five years. Continuation legislation will address the issues raised during the
committee of reference discussions.
2
September 20, 2006
SUNSET REPORT REQUIREMENTS
Pursuant to Section 41-2954 subsection F, Arizona Revised Statutes
*** Note: The following answers are a summary ofthe information provided by the Arizona
Department ofEnvironmental Quality (ADEQ). Please see Attachment 2for the complete ADEQ
response to the sunsetfactors required by A.R.S. § 41-2954 subsections D and F.
I. An identification of the problem or need that the advisory committee is intended to
address.
According to ADEQ, polluted runoff from nonpoint sources is the largest source
of pollution in Arizona's impaired streams, rivers and lakes. Grazing livestock near
Arizona's waterbodies can impact water quality by eroding streambanks. This erosion
causes increased sedimentation, turbidity and nutrients that affect aquatic wildlife. In
addition, there may be increases in coliform bacteria, a direct threat to public health.
Implementation of voluntary best management practices will help reduce these impacts of
polluted runoff and help cleanse Arizona's impaired waterbodies.
II. A statement, to the extent practicable, in quantitative and qualitative terms, of the
objectives of the advisory committee and its anticipated accomplishments.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee made
recommendations that culminated in GRRC's approval ofR18-9-501, otherwise known
as the Surface Water Quality General Grazing Permit. The committee has finished its
work.
III. An identification of any other agencies having similar, conflicting or duplicate
objectives, and an explanation of the manner in which the agency avoids duplication
or conflicts with other such agencies.
No conflicts appear to exist.
IV. An assessment of the consequences of eliminating the advisory committee or of
consolidating it with another agency.
The Legislature should eliminate this committee since its work is complete. If
additional issues should arise ADEQ has an extensive stakeholder process at which the
cattle industry can bring whomever they like to advocate for their concerns. ADEQ
contemplates no substantive changes on these issues in the foreseeable future. If,
however, changes are needed, the agency would use its stakeholder process to bring
together affected parties for their input and expertise.
3
Attachments
1. Letter from Rep. Russ Jones to ADEQ requesting information.
2. Sunset factors pursuant to A.R.S § 41-2954, subsections D and F.
3. Meeting Notice.
4. Minutes of Committee of Reference Meeting.
September 20, 2006
4
RUSSELL L. JONES
1700 WEST WASHINGTON, SUITE H
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007-2844
CAPITOL PHONE: (602) 926-5273
CAPITOL FAX: (602) 417-3124
TOLL FREE: 1-800-352-8404
rjones@azleg.gov
DISTRICT 24
June 20, 2006
Stephen Owens
Director, ADEQ
1110 W. Washington St.
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Dear Director Owens:
Attachment 1
COMMITTEES:
NATURAL RESOURCES AND
AGRICULTURE,
VICE-CHAIRMAN
COUNTIES, MUNICIPALITIES AND
MILITARY AFFAIRS
TRANSPORTATION
The sunset review process prescribed in Title 41, Chapter 27, Arizona Revised Statutes,
provides a system for the Legislature to evaluate the need to continue the existence of state
agencies. During the sunset review process, an agency is reviewed by a legislative committee
of reference. On completion of the sunset review, the committee of reference recommends to
continue revise, consolidate or terminate the agency.
The Joint Legislative Audit Committee has assigned the sunset review of the Grazing Best
Management Practices Advisory Committee to the committee of reference comprised of
members of the House of Representatives Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee and
the Senate Natural Resources and Rural Affairs Committee.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-2954, the committee of reference is required to consider certain factors
in deciding whether to recommend continuance, modification or termination of an agency.
Please provide your response to those factors as provided below:
1. The objective and purpose in establishing the agency.
2. The effectiveness with which the agency has met its objective and purpose and the
efficiency with which it has operated.
3. The extent to which the agency has operated within the public interest.
4. The extent to which rules adopted by the agency are consistent with the legislative
mandate.
5. The extent to which the agency has encouraged input from the public before adopting its
rules and the extent to which it has informed the public as to its actions and their
expected impact on the public.
6. The extent to which the agency has been able to investigate and resolve complaints that
are within its jurisdiction.
7. The extent to which the Attorney General or any other applicable agency of state
government has the authority to prosecute actions under the enabling legislation.
8. The extent to which the agency has addressed deficiencies in its enabling statues that
prevent it from fulfilling its statutory mandate.
9. The extent to which changes are necessary in the laws of the agency to adequately
comply with these factors.
10. The extent to which the termination of the agency would significantly harm the public
health, safety or welfare.
11. The extent to which the level of regulation exercised by the agency is appropriate and
whether less or more stringent levels of regulation would be appropriate.
12. The extent to which the agency has used private contractors in the performance of its
duties and how effective use of private contractors could be accomplished.
Additionally please provide written responses to the following:
1. An identification of the problem or the needs that the agency is intended to address.
2. A statement, to the extent practicable, in quantitative and qualitative terms, of the
objectives of such agency and its anticipated accomplishments.
3. An identification of any other agencies having similar, conflicting or duplicate objectives,
and an explanation of the manner in which the agency avoids duplication or conflict with
other such agencies.
4. An assessment of the consequences of eliminating the agency or of consolidating it with
another agency.
In addition to responding to the factors in A.R.S. § 41-2954, please provide the committee of
reference with a copy of your most recent annual report. Your response should be received by
August 1, 2006 so we may proceed with the sunset review and schedule the required public
hearing. Please submit the requested information to:
Kathi Knox, Majority Research Staff
Arizona House of Representatives
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me at 6902-926-5273 or Kathi Knox, the House of Representatives Natural Resources and
Agriculture Committee Analyst, at 602-926-5480.
Sincerely,
~~
Russell Jones, State Representative
Chair, Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee of Reference
cc: Joan Card
Don Butler
Herb Guenther
Dean Sander
Janet Napolitano
Governor
August 9, 2006
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT
OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
1110 West Washington Street· Phoenix, Arizona 85007
(602) 771-2300 .http://azdeq.gov
Attachment 2
~~~~ ~\~;
\~OM-::-- &
~'1ENTp.."
Stephen A. Owens
Director
The Honorable Russell 1. Jones
House of Representatives
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, Az. 85007
Dear Chairman Jones:
Enclosed you will fmd the sunset review report for the Grazing Best Management Practices
Advisory Committee. After consultation with the Agricultural Community, ADEQ recommends
that pursuant to ARS §41-2954 the legislature sunset these committees established by ARS §49­202.01.
This committee met several times in 2000 and convened a public hearing on January 8,
2001 to discuss its General Permit proposal.
The Governor's Regulatory Review Council approved the Surface Water Quality General
Grazing Permit, rule R18-9-501, on April 3, 2001 and it was filed with the Secretary of State's
Office on April 5,2001.
The committee has fmished its work. If rule changes affecting Arizona agriculture become
appropriate in the future, ADEQ plans to use its long-standing and effective stakeholder process
and that process will include whomever the cattle industry chooses to bring to the table. The
agency, however, does not believe the rules need changing in the foreseeable future.
The agency looks forward to the meeting on August 24th when we can discuss this issue with the
committee. If you have any questions before then, please do not hesitate to give me a call at
(602)771-2204.
Sf'.,cerelyC\ iJ__
\~,;y)-SUj)JJL
1="0 r E;tbCk J. Curringham
Northern Regional Office
1515 East Cedar Avenue' Suite F • Flagstaff, AZ. 86004
(928) 779-0313
Southern Regional Office
400 West Congress Street· Suite 433' Tucson, AZ. 85701
(520) 628-6733
Printed on recycled paper
SUNSET REPORT REQUIRED PURSUANT TO § 41-2954, ARIZONA REVISED
STATUTES FOR THE GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1. The objective and purpose in establishing the advisory committee.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee was established by
the Legislature in 1997 to develop and recommend voluntary best management
practices for discharges to navigable streams to the Director of the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). The Legislature charged the
committees with periodically re-examining, evaluating and proposing
modifications to grazing best management practices.
2. The effectiveness with which the advisory committee has met its
objective and purpose and the efficiency with which it has operated.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee, established under
ARS § 49-202.01, met several times during 2000. The committee developed four
voluntary best management practices for persons engaged in livestock grazing.
The practices, ranging from managing grazing activities, installing rangeland
improvements and implementing land treatment, have the goal of maintaining
soil cover and preventing accelerated erosion, nitrogen discharges and bacterial
impacts to surface waters above natural background amounts to help achieve
surface water quality standards.
The committee's activities ultimately culminated in the Surface Water
Quality General Grazing Permit, R18-9-501.
3. The extent to which the advisory committee has operated within the public
interest.
The committee recommended voluntary best management practices which it
determined to be the most practical and effective means of reducing or preventing
the non-point source discharge of pollutants into navigable waters by grazing
activities. The Governor's Regulatory Review Council (GRRC) adopted R18-9­SOlon
April 3, 2001. It was filed with the Secretary of State's Office and became
effective on AprilS, 2001.
4. The extent to which rules adopted by the agency are consistent with the
legislative mandate.
In adopting voluntary grazing best management practices, ARS § 49-202.01 (C)
required the committee to consider:
1. The availability and effectiveness of alternative technologies.
2. The economic and social impacts of alternative technologies on grazing
and associated industries.
3. The institutional considerations of alternative technologies.
4. The potential nature and severity of discharges from grazing
activities and their effect on navigable waters.
The rule is open-ended enough to allow an operator under the provisions of a
General Permit to make decisions based on the above considerations. Of course,
the ultimate goal of the General Permit is to require livestock operators to achieve
Surface Water Quality Standards. The rule allows this to be done in the most
efficient and cost-effective way as long as Surface Water Quality Standards are
met. The Governor's Regulatory Review Council also found the rule
to be consistent with legislative intent.
5. The extent to which the agency has encouraged input from the public before
adopting its rules and the extent to which it has informed the public as to its
actions and their expected impact on the public.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee met under the
Open Meeting Law and held a public hearing on January 8, 2001 to discuss the
proposed General Permit. In addition, GRRC found that all comments on the
proposed rule had been adequately addressed.
6. The extent to which the agency has been able to investigate and resolve
complaints that are within its jurisdiction.
The committee has not met since January 8, 2001.
7. The extent to which the Attorney General or any other applicable agency of
state government has the authority to prosecute actions under the enabling
legislation.
According to ARS § 49-261 through 49-265, the Attorney General's Office
may enforce violations of water quality standards.
8. The extent to which the advisory committee has addressed deficiencies in its
enabling statutes that prevent it from fulfilling its statutory mission.
None.
9. The extent to which changes are necessary in the laws of the agency to
adequately comply with the factors listed in this subsection.
ADEQ had adopted rules based on input from the advisory committees in the
1990s. Since that time ADEQ has relied on its extensive stakeholder process
to reach the agricultural community and will continue to do so. One example
is the pesticide rules adopted in 2005. No changes in the law appear necessary at
this time.
10. The extent to which the termination ofthe advisory committee would
significantly harm the public health, safety or welfare.
The advisory committee effectively finished its mission with GRRC's approval of
the proposed rule on April 3, 2001 and when the agency filed the rule with the
Secretary of State's Office two days later on April 5, 2001. The agency does not
foresee changes in the rule at this time; therefore, termination of the Grazing Best
Management Practices Advisory Committee would not harm the public health,
safety, or welfare.
11. The extent to which the level of regulation exercised by the agency is
appropriate and whether less or more stringent levels of regulation would
be appropriate.
No complaints have arisen as a result of this rule. If complaints arose, the
agency has a stakeholder process it uses when issues arise.
12. The extent to which the advisory committee has used private contractors in
the performance of its duties and how effective use of private contractors
could be accomplished.
Stakeholders met in a series of meetings in 2000, culminating with a public
hearing on January 8, 2001 and a GRRC hearing on April 3, 2001. ADEQ does
not believe the issue of using a consultant to propose the General Permit rule was
ever discussed. ADEQ feels the stakeholder process uses input from the people
most affected by rule changes and that the input of these volunteers is critical in
promulgating an effective rule.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS
I. An identification of the problem or the needs that the agency is intended
to address.
According to ADEQ, polluted runoff from non-point sources is the largest source
of pollution in Arizona's impaired streams, rivers and lakes. Grazing livestock
near Arizona's waterbodies can impact water quality by eroding streambanks.
This erosion causes increased sedimentation, turbidity and nutrients that effect
aquatic wildlife. In addition, there may be increases in coliform bacteria, a direct
threat to public health. Implementation of voluntary best management practices
will help reduce these impacts of polluted runoff and help cleanse Arizona's
impaired waterbodies.
II. A statement, to the extent practicable, in quantitative and qualitative terms,
of the objectives of the advisory committee and its anticipated
accomplishments.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee made
recommendations that culminated in GRRC's approval ofR18-9-501,
otherwise known as the Surface Water Quality General Grazing Permit.
The committee has finished its work.
III. An identification ofany other agencies having similar, conflicting or
duplicate objectives, and an explanation of the manner in which the agency
avoids duplication or conflict with other such agencies.
No conflicts appear to exist.
IV. An assessment of the consequences of eliminating the agency or of
consolidating it with another agency.
The Legislature should eliminate this committee since its work is complete. If
additional issues should arise, ADEQ has an extensive stakeholder process at
which the cattle industry can bring whomever they like to advocate for their
concerns. ADEQ contemplates no substantive rule changes on these issues in the
foreseeable future. If, however, changes are needed, the agency would use its
stakeholder process to bring together affected parties for their input and expertise.
Attachment 3
Interim agendas can be obtained via the Internet at http://www.azleg.state.az.us/lnterimCommittees.asp
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
INTERIM MEETING NOTICE
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND RURAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES NATURAL RESOURCES AND AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE OF
REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Date:
Time:
Place:
Friday, September 1, 2006
2:00 P.M.
HHR3
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Opening Remarks
3. Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee
• Presentation
• Public Testimony
• Discussion
• Recommendations by the Committee of Reference
4. Agricultural Best Management Practices Advisory Committees
• Presentation
• Public Testimony
• Discussion
• Recommendations by the Committee of Reference
5. Adjourn
Members:
Senator Jake Flake, Co-Chair
Senator Marsha Arzberger
Senator Tim Bee
Senator Robert Blendu
Senator Robert Cannell
8/25/06
jmb
Representative Russ Jones, Co-Chair
Representative Cheryl Chase
Representative Ann Kirkpatrick
Representative Tom O'Halleran
Representative Kyrsten Sinema
People with disabilities may request reasonable accommodations such as interpreters,
alternative formats, or assistance with physical accessibility. If you require accommodations,
please contact the Chief Clerk's Office at (602) 926-3032, TOO (602) 926-3241.
Page 1 of 1
Attachment 4
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
Forty-seventh Legislature - Second Regular Session
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND RURAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES NATURAL RESOURCES AND AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE
OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Minutes of Meeting
Friday, September 1,2006
House Hearing Room 3 -- 2:00 p.m.
CoChairman Jones called the meeting to order at 2:07 p.m. and attendance was noted by the
secretary.
Members Present
Senator Tim Bee
Senator Robert Blendu
Senator Robert Cannell
Representative Cheryl Chase
Senator Marsha Arzberger
Representative Ann Kirkpatrick
Representative Kyrsten Sinema
Senator Jake Flake, Co-Chair
Representative Russ Jones, CoChair
Members Absent
Representative Tom O'Halleran
Speakers Present
Kathi Knox, Majority Research Analyst
Jim Buster, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
Shelly A. Tunis, Legislative Liaison, Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association
Rick Lavis, Vice-President, Arizona Cotton Growers
Bas Aja, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Cattlemen's Association
CoChairman Jones thanked everyone for their patience and perseverance since the last meeting
which was short a quorum. Good use was made of the time since then as a stakeholders' meeting
was held which produced some good ideas. Testimony will be heard by two different individuals
today.
Kathi Knox, Majority Research Analyst, stated that the sunset review process is an evaluation
tool used to determine if agencies should be continued. Every agency or commission is required
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENTPRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1,2006
to go through a review at least every ten years. Sunset reviews are based on a sunset audit
prepared by the Auditor General's office, or, as in this instance, the committee of reference
(COR). The COR is required to submit a sunset committee review report containing
recommendations. The legislative staff will then prepare legislation if continuation is
recommended and draft a report. The legislation would be introduced in the 2007 session to
continue the agencies beyond the termination date of July 1,2007.
Jim Buster, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), stated
that, since the agencies have not met for a while, the position of ADEQ is not to continue the
agencies. In speaking to some of the members and stakeholders, such as Bas Aja, while waiting
for a quorum last week, a compromise was reached to collapse the two committees into one.
Mr. Buster believes they have the compromise to bring together the effective stakeholders, the
regulators and industry members. He recommended Bas Aja and C.B. "Doc" Lane for the
advisory committee. No major changes are foreseen in the near future, In terms of nitrogen
application, the final report was made in 1998 and those issues are not surfacing. He noted that
Joan Card, Director, Water Quality Division, is present to answer questions (Attachments 1
and 2).
CoChairman Jones mentioned that staggered terms were originally established so all the
knowledge and experience of the committee is not lost at the same time. He is not sure that is in
the draft and asked if it is a good idea to include staggered terms. Mr. Buster said the
stakeholders are not adamant on that issue and did not include staggered terms. The committees
have not met in a while. The requirement for a certain number of Republicans and Democrats
was removed because it is difficult to fill those positions. The new committee may not meet in
the next five years and and perhaps a sunset of five years is needed as Mr Aja suggested;
however, even though staggered terms is a good idea, he does not believe it is necessary in this
case.
Senator Blendu asked why both committees should not be sunset if the committee that will be
established will not meet in the foreseeable future.
Senator Flake answered that the Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee was
established about eight years ago because of strong objections he had with a ruling by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). At that time meetings were being held around the state
about nitrogen in the ground due to cattle grazing. He attended a meeting in Flagstaff where he
heard things he could not believe. It was almost to the point that in order to comply with the
regulations, the cattle would have to be diapered. He did not say anything in the meeting but
spoke later with the Director of ADEQ who did not know the substance ofthe meetings. Because
of the ridiculous things that were said, the Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory
Committee was formed so everything would have to go through the committee. Senator Flake
said there does not seem to be anything on the horizon at present, but with EPA something could
come up any time. He believes it is important to retain the committee in order to counteract these
types of problems, and he believes it can be of assistance to ADEQ.
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
2
Senator Blendu said he would like to have this explanation on record so these kinds of policies
come through the Legislature as opposed to a fiat from an agency. CoChairman Jones agreed. He
said he sees it is more as a contingency committee, and, due to the lengthy time it takes to go
through the rule-making process, there is an advantage in that it is already in place. Hopefully,
the committee will never have to meet, but it will be available to take care of any issues if it is
necessary.
Shelly A. Tunis, Legislative Liaison, Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association, stated that in 1986 the
Legislature decided that nitrogen fertilizer used in farming operations needed to be regulated in
the State of Arizona so Best Management Practices (BMP) was adopted. Also, in 1986 the
Legislature created ADEQ. One of the reasons the Legislature created best management
practices on nitrogen fertilizer was because there was no experience of what ADEQ would do
since it did not previously exist. Now, 20 years later, it is known what ADEQ does with nitrogen
fertilizer (Attachment 3). ADEQ has not changed the rules since 1991. There is no outcry from
the public or industry to change these rules which seem to be working, and, in the interim, the
Legislature adopted a procedure with more input from stakeholders in the rule-making process.
All that leads to the conclusion that issues related to nitrogen fertilizer and best management
practices in farming operations have been settled and stakeholders have had enough input in the
ADEQ process over the past couple of years. For that reason, the Yuma Fresh Vegetable
Association supports the sunset of the Agricultural Best Management Practices Advisory
Commitees.
Mr. Jones asked Ms. Tunis' opinion about melding the two committees. Ms. Tunis stated she has
no opinion about the part relating to cattle. Senator Flake asked if it would provide the necessary
protection even though it is a larger committee with representations of the livestock industry and
agriculture. Ms. Tunis said she understands there are no agricultural people on the draft
committee, only livestock personnel.
Rick Lavis, Vice-President, Arizona Cotton Growers Association, stated he is present to second
the positions stated, especially Senator Flake's position. This is the first time in 25 years he can
remember being in favor of a sunset, and, in this case, it is absolutely justifiable. He was here
when the 1986 act was passed which was done for a number of reasons. The environmental
community believed farmers were using an excessive amount of nitrogen fertilizers on crops and
could be polluting groundwater. The possibility of producing "blue babies" was brought out in
the legislative process resulting in the creation of the BMPs and the request to create a statutory
reference on these issues. The issue before this committee is not nitrogen fertilizer, but whether
the structure created in 1986 is still appropriate. Mr. Lavis said he does not believe so, and
therefore, supports the sunsetting of the Agricultural Best Management Practices Advisory
Committee. The Legislature required in statute that rules be produced on nitrogen fertilizer. As
an issue for groundwater contamination, he referred to a report produced in 1991 by the
University of Arizona and read the following into the record.
"The spatial distribution of the wells testing above the 10 mg standard does not
present any clear association with human activities which may be responsible for
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEA~TNG OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENTPRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
3
these elevated nitrate levels. Intensive agricultural areas, as well as with locations
with no agriculture at all, have shown elevated nitrate levels in well water."
"Contributions of nitrates can come from multiple sources, including mineralized soil,
organic matter, geological deposits, septic tanks, sewage-treatment plants,
concentrated animal operations, and agricultural applications of nitrogen fertilizer."
He stated that the conclusion of the report is that it is almost impossible to find where those
intensive nitrates might be.
Mr. Lavis continued by saying that the last issue was the "blue babies." The presence of
excessive nitrates in drinking water is the most serious for bottled-fed infants less than 6 months
old whose immature digestive systems are unable to properly metabolize nitrates. Bacteria in an
infant's stomach converts nitrates to nitrites that react with hemoglobin to form methemoglobin,
a condition referred to as methaemoglobinaemia. This molecule is unable to carry oxygen, so
symptoms of oxygen starvation begin to occur. Because oxygen starvation causes a bluish
discoloration of the body, it is commonly referred to as "blue baby disease" which is potentially
fatal but very easy to treat if diagnosed. The number of incidences is very difficult to determine
because it is not a disease that is routinely reported to public health agencies. As of the date of
the 1991 report no confirmed cases resulting from agriculture contamination were reported in
Arizona.
Mr. Lavis said maybe the 1986 act was ahead of the realities because nothing has been seen since
and ADEQ has not raised the issue. There have also been no reported instances by the public
health system. He believes it is unnecessary to have a BMP committee in place as there are other
structures to handle any cases should they occur.
Senator Cannell said it seems that the main argument is there are other methods to deal with this.
One could get to a point technologically where nitrogen could be traced to the source, whether
from farming or elsewhere. Mr. Lavis said that the most important thing is that it is not related
directly to agriculture.
Bas Aja, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Cattlemen's Association, said he supports the sunset of the
nitrogen fertilizer committee and combination of the other two (Attachment 4). Regarding Mr.
Lavis' testimony about the "blue baby" syndrome, etc. and how things have changed, the most
important regulation he has seen relating to nitrogen fertilizer came about because of a very
tragic incident, the Oklahoma City bombing. Now it is important to trace fertilizer to where it is
being used and who has it. It is also being used to produce electricity and methane, and the
Japanese have even produced gasoline from manure. There are still a few federal laws coming
down the pike so he would like to see a committee in place in case the state has to address some
federal rules.
Mr. Aja said he would also be remiss if he did not thank the ADEQ for working with the
stakeholders.
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARlNG OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRlCULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
4
Senator Flake asked his opinion as to five-year terms versus the ten-years. He believes five years
works.
CoChairman Jones asked if there is any reason to include staggered terms if the committee
recommends a five-year continuation. Mr. Aja answered that it would probably be better to have
continuity, so 5-year terms would be fine in this case. If 10 years was recommended, there
should be some staggering.
Senator Flake moved the adoption of the proposed language that was
distributed that combines the best management practices issues relating to
livestock, into Q!!!; advisory committee instead of two. This would be for a
period of 5 years and provide for staggered terms for committee members
and allow any current members to complete their terms. The motion carried.
Senator Flake moved the reconsideration of the above motion. The motion
carried.
Senator Flake moved the adoption of the proposed language that was
distributed that combines the best management practices issues relating to
livestock, into Q.!!.!; advisory committee instead of two. This would be for a
period of five years. The motion carried.
Senator Flake moved that the Nitrogen Fertilizer Best Management Practices
Advisory Committee be allowed to terminate. The motion carried.
The CoChairman instructed staff to prepare legislation to make these changes and draft the COR
report for next session.
Without objection, the meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
Pat Hudock, Committee Secretary
September 7, 2006
(Original minutes, attachments and tape on file in the Office of the Chief Clerk)
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
5

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

Copyright to this resource is held by the creating agency and is provided here for educational purposes only. It may not be downloaded, reproduced or distributed in any format without written permission of the creating agency. Any attempt to circumvent the access controls placed on this file is a violation of United States and international copyright laws, and is subject to criminal prosecution.

Speaker Weiers
Arizona House of Representatives
House Majority Research
MEMORANDUM
Kathi Knox
Deputy Director of Research
Legislative Research Analyst,
Natural Resources andAgriculture Committee
To: JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007-2848
Office (602) 926-5480
FAX (602) 417-3134
Re: Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee
Date: September 20,2006
Attached is the final report of the sunset review of the Grazing Best Management
Practices Advisory Committee, which was conducted by the House of Representatives Natural
Resources and Agriculture and Senate Natural Resources and Rural Affairs Committee of
Reference on September 1, 2006.
This report has been distributed to the following individuals and agencies:
Governor of the State of Arizona
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
President of the Senate
Senator Ken Bennett
Senate Members
Senator Jake Flake, Cochair
Senator Marsha Arzberger
Senator Timothy S. Bee
Senator Robert Blendu
Senator Robert Cannell
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Representative Jim Weiers
House Members
Representative Russ Jones, Cochair
Representative Cheryl Chase
Representative Ann Kirkpatrick
Representative Tom O'Halleran
Representative Kyrsten Sinema
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
Department of Library, Archives & Public Records
Auditor General
Senate Republican Staff
Senate Research Staff
Senate Democratic Staff
Senate Resource Center
House Majority Staff
House Research Staff
House Democratic Staff
Chief Clerk
September 20, 2006
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE REPORT:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Background
Pursuant to Section 41-2953, Arizona Revised Statutes, the Joint Legislative Audit
Committee (JLAC) assigned the sunset review of the Grazing Best Management Practices
Advisory Committee to the Senate Natural Resources and Rural Affairs and the House of
Representatives Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee of Reference.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee was established by the
Legislature in 1997 to develop and recommend voluntary best management practices for
discharges to navigable streams. Recommendations are to be made to the Director of the
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). The Legislature charged the committee
with periodically re-examining, evaluating and proposing modifications to grazing best
management practices.
Committee ofReference Sunset Review Procedures
The Committee of Reference held a public hearing on September 1, 2006, to review the
ADEQ response to the sunset factors as required by A.R.S § 41-2954, subsections D and F, and
to receive public testimony (See Attachment 4). Testimony was received from Jim Buster,
ADEQ legislative liaison; Shelly Tunis, Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association; Rick Lavis, Arizona
Cottongrowers' Association; and Bas Aja, Arizona Cattlemen's Association.
Committee ofReference Recommendations
The Committee of Reference recommended that the Grazing Best Management
Practices Advisory Committee be combined with the Agricultural Best Management
Advisory Committee for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) and be
continued for five years. Continuation legislation will address the issues raised during the
committee of reference discussions.
2
September 20, 2006
SUNSET REPORT REQUIREMENTS
Pursuant to Section 41-2954 subsection F, Arizona Revised Statutes
*** Note: The following answers are a summary ofthe information provided by the Arizona
Department ofEnvironmental Quality (ADEQ). Please see Attachment 2for the complete ADEQ
response to the sunsetfactors required by A.R.S. § 41-2954 subsections D and F.
I. An identification of the problem or need that the advisory committee is intended to
address.
According to ADEQ, polluted runoff from nonpoint sources is the largest source
of pollution in Arizona's impaired streams, rivers and lakes. Grazing livestock near
Arizona's waterbodies can impact water quality by eroding streambanks. This erosion
causes increased sedimentation, turbidity and nutrients that affect aquatic wildlife. In
addition, there may be increases in coliform bacteria, a direct threat to public health.
Implementation of voluntary best management practices will help reduce these impacts of
polluted runoff and help cleanse Arizona's impaired waterbodies.
II. A statement, to the extent practicable, in quantitative and qualitative terms, of the
objectives of the advisory committee and its anticipated accomplishments.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee made
recommendations that culminated in GRRC's approval ofR18-9-501, otherwise known
as the Surface Water Quality General Grazing Permit. The committee has finished its
work.
III. An identification of any other agencies having similar, conflicting or duplicate
objectives, and an explanation of the manner in which the agency avoids duplication
or conflicts with other such agencies.
No conflicts appear to exist.
IV. An assessment of the consequences of eliminating the advisory committee or of
consolidating it with another agency.
The Legislature should eliminate this committee since its work is complete. If
additional issues should arise ADEQ has an extensive stakeholder process at which the
cattle industry can bring whomever they like to advocate for their concerns. ADEQ
contemplates no substantive changes on these issues in the foreseeable future. If,
however, changes are needed, the agency would use its stakeholder process to bring
together affected parties for their input and expertise.
3
Attachments
1. Letter from Rep. Russ Jones to ADEQ requesting information.
2. Sunset factors pursuant to A.R.S § 41-2954, subsections D and F.
3. Meeting Notice.
4. Minutes of Committee of Reference Meeting.
September 20, 2006
4
RUSSELL L. JONES
1700 WEST WASHINGTON, SUITE H
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007-2844
CAPITOL PHONE: (602) 926-5273
CAPITOL FAX: (602) 417-3124
TOLL FREE: 1-800-352-8404
rjones@azleg.gov
DISTRICT 24
June 20, 2006
Stephen Owens
Director, ADEQ
1110 W. Washington St.
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Dear Director Owens:
Attachment 1
COMMITTEES:
NATURAL RESOURCES AND
AGRICULTURE,
VICE-CHAIRMAN
COUNTIES, MUNICIPALITIES AND
MILITARY AFFAIRS
TRANSPORTATION
The sunset review process prescribed in Title 41, Chapter 27, Arizona Revised Statutes,
provides a system for the Legislature to evaluate the need to continue the existence of state
agencies. During the sunset review process, an agency is reviewed by a legislative committee
of reference. On completion of the sunset review, the committee of reference recommends to
continue revise, consolidate or terminate the agency.
The Joint Legislative Audit Committee has assigned the sunset review of the Grazing Best
Management Practices Advisory Committee to the committee of reference comprised of
members of the House of Representatives Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee and
the Senate Natural Resources and Rural Affairs Committee.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-2954, the committee of reference is required to consider certain factors
in deciding whether to recommend continuance, modification or termination of an agency.
Please provide your response to those factors as provided below:
1. The objective and purpose in establishing the agency.
2. The effectiveness with which the agency has met its objective and purpose and the
efficiency with which it has operated.
3. The extent to which the agency has operated within the public interest.
4. The extent to which rules adopted by the agency are consistent with the legislative
mandate.
5. The extent to which the agency has encouraged input from the public before adopting its
rules and the extent to which it has informed the public as to its actions and their
expected impact on the public.
6. The extent to which the agency has been able to investigate and resolve complaints that
are within its jurisdiction.
7. The extent to which the Attorney General or any other applicable agency of state
government has the authority to prosecute actions under the enabling legislation.
8. The extent to which the agency has addressed deficiencies in its enabling statues that
prevent it from fulfilling its statutory mandate.
9. The extent to which changes are necessary in the laws of the agency to adequately
comply with these factors.
10. The extent to which the termination of the agency would significantly harm the public
health, safety or welfare.
11. The extent to which the level of regulation exercised by the agency is appropriate and
whether less or more stringent levels of regulation would be appropriate.
12. The extent to which the agency has used private contractors in the performance of its
duties and how effective use of private contractors could be accomplished.
Additionally please provide written responses to the following:
1. An identification of the problem or the needs that the agency is intended to address.
2. A statement, to the extent practicable, in quantitative and qualitative terms, of the
objectives of such agency and its anticipated accomplishments.
3. An identification of any other agencies having similar, conflicting or duplicate objectives,
and an explanation of the manner in which the agency avoids duplication or conflict with
other such agencies.
4. An assessment of the consequences of eliminating the agency or of consolidating it with
another agency.
In addition to responding to the factors in A.R.S. § 41-2954, please provide the committee of
reference with a copy of your most recent annual report. Your response should be received by
August 1, 2006 so we may proceed with the sunset review and schedule the required public
hearing. Please submit the requested information to:
Kathi Knox, Majority Research Staff
Arizona House of Representatives
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me at 6902-926-5273 or Kathi Knox, the House of Representatives Natural Resources and
Agriculture Committee Analyst, at 602-926-5480.
Sincerely,
~~
Russell Jones, State Representative
Chair, Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee of Reference
cc: Joan Card
Don Butler
Herb Guenther
Dean Sander
Janet Napolitano
Governor
August 9, 2006
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT
OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
1110 West Washington Street· Phoenix, Arizona 85007
(602) 771-2300 .http://azdeq.gov
Attachment 2
~~~~ ~\~;
\~OM-::-- &
~'1ENTp.."
Stephen A. Owens
Director
The Honorable Russell 1. Jones
House of Representatives
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, Az. 85007
Dear Chairman Jones:
Enclosed you will fmd the sunset review report for the Grazing Best Management Practices
Advisory Committee. After consultation with the Agricultural Community, ADEQ recommends
that pursuant to ARS §41-2954 the legislature sunset these committees established by ARS §49­202.01.
This committee met several times in 2000 and convened a public hearing on January 8,
2001 to discuss its General Permit proposal.
The Governor's Regulatory Review Council approved the Surface Water Quality General
Grazing Permit, rule R18-9-501, on April 3, 2001 and it was filed with the Secretary of State's
Office on April 5,2001.
The committee has fmished its work. If rule changes affecting Arizona agriculture become
appropriate in the future, ADEQ plans to use its long-standing and effective stakeholder process
and that process will include whomever the cattle industry chooses to bring to the table. The
agency, however, does not believe the rules need changing in the foreseeable future.
The agency looks forward to the meeting on August 24th when we can discuss this issue with the
committee. If you have any questions before then, please do not hesitate to give me a call at
(602)771-2204.
Sf'.,cerelyC\ iJ__
\~,;y)-SUj)JJL
1="0 r E;tbCk J. Curringham
Northern Regional Office
1515 East Cedar Avenue' Suite F • Flagstaff, AZ. 86004
(928) 779-0313
Southern Regional Office
400 West Congress Street· Suite 433' Tucson, AZ. 85701
(520) 628-6733
Printed on recycled paper
SUNSET REPORT REQUIRED PURSUANT TO § 41-2954, ARIZONA REVISED
STATUTES FOR THE GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1. The objective and purpose in establishing the advisory committee.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee was established by
the Legislature in 1997 to develop and recommend voluntary best management
practices for discharges to navigable streams to the Director of the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). The Legislature charged the
committees with periodically re-examining, evaluating and proposing
modifications to grazing best management practices.
2. The effectiveness with which the advisory committee has met its
objective and purpose and the efficiency with which it has operated.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee, established under
ARS § 49-202.01, met several times during 2000. The committee developed four
voluntary best management practices for persons engaged in livestock grazing.
The practices, ranging from managing grazing activities, installing rangeland
improvements and implementing land treatment, have the goal of maintaining
soil cover and preventing accelerated erosion, nitrogen discharges and bacterial
impacts to surface waters above natural background amounts to help achieve
surface water quality standards.
The committee's activities ultimately culminated in the Surface Water
Quality General Grazing Permit, R18-9-501.
3. The extent to which the advisory committee has operated within the public
interest.
The committee recommended voluntary best management practices which it
determined to be the most practical and effective means of reducing or preventing
the non-point source discharge of pollutants into navigable waters by grazing
activities. The Governor's Regulatory Review Council (GRRC) adopted R18-9­SOlon
April 3, 2001. It was filed with the Secretary of State's Office and became
effective on AprilS, 2001.
4. The extent to which rules adopted by the agency are consistent with the
legislative mandate.
In adopting voluntary grazing best management practices, ARS § 49-202.01 (C)
required the committee to consider:
1. The availability and effectiveness of alternative technologies.
2. The economic and social impacts of alternative technologies on grazing
and associated industries.
3. The institutional considerations of alternative technologies.
4. The potential nature and severity of discharges from grazing
activities and their effect on navigable waters.
The rule is open-ended enough to allow an operator under the provisions of a
General Permit to make decisions based on the above considerations. Of course,
the ultimate goal of the General Permit is to require livestock operators to achieve
Surface Water Quality Standards. The rule allows this to be done in the most
efficient and cost-effective way as long as Surface Water Quality Standards are
met. The Governor's Regulatory Review Council also found the rule
to be consistent with legislative intent.
5. The extent to which the agency has encouraged input from the public before
adopting its rules and the extent to which it has informed the public as to its
actions and their expected impact on the public.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee met under the
Open Meeting Law and held a public hearing on January 8, 2001 to discuss the
proposed General Permit. In addition, GRRC found that all comments on the
proposed rule had been adequately addressed.
6. The extent to which the agency has been able to investigate and resolve
complaints that are within its jurisdiction.
The committee has not met since January 8, 2001.
7. The extent to which the Attorney General or any other applicable agency of
state government has the authority to prosecute actions under the enabling
legislation.
According to ARS § 49-261 through 49-265, the Attorney General's Office
may enforce violations of water quality standards.
8. The extent to which the advisory committee has addressed deficiencies in its
enabling statutes that prevent it from fulfilling its statutory mission.
None.
9. The extent to which changes are necessary in the laws of the agency to
adequately comply with the factors listed in this subsection.
ADEQ had adopted rules based on input from the advisory committees in the
1990s. Since that time ADEQ has relied on its extensive stakeholder process
to reach the agricultural community and will continue to do so. One example
is the pesticide rules adopted in 2005. No changes in the law appear necessary at
this time.
10. The extent to which the termination ofthe advisory committee would
significantly harm the public health, safety or welfare.
The advisory committee effectively finished its mission with GRRC's approval of
the proposed rule on April 3, 2001 and when the agency filed the rule with the
Secretary of State's Office two days later on April 5, 2001. The agency does not
foresee changes in the rule at this time; therefore, termination of the Grazing Best
Management Practices Advisory Committee would not harm the public health,
safety, or welfare.
11. The extent to which the level of regulation exercised by the agency is
appropriate and whether less or more stringent levels of regulation would
be appropriate.
No complaints have arisen as a result of this rule. If complaints arose, the
agency has a stakeholder process it uses when issues arise.
12. The extent to which the advisory committee has used private contractors in
the performance of its duties and how effective use of private contractors
could be accomplished.
Stakeholders met in a series of meetings in 2000, culminating with a public
hearing on January 8, 2001 and a GRRC hearing on April 3, 2001. ADEQ does
not believe the issue of using a consultant to propose the General Permit rule was
ever discussed. ADEQ feels the stakeholder process uses input from the people
most affected by rule changes and that the input of these volunteers is critical in
promulgating an effective rule.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS
I. An identification of the problem or the needs that the agency is intended
to address.
According to ADEQ, polluted runoff from non-point sources is the largest source
of pollution in Arizona's impaired streams, rivers and lakes. Grazing livestock
near Arizona's waterbodies can impact water quality by eroding streambanks.
This erosion causes increased sedimentation, turbidity and nutrients that effect
aquatic wildlife. In addition, there may be increases in coliform bacteria, a direct
threat to public health. Implementation of voluntary best management practices
will help reduce these impacts of polluted runoff and help cleanse Arizona's
impaired waterbodies.
II. A statement, to the extent practicable, in quantitative and qualitative terms,
of the objectives of the advisory committee and its anticipated
accomplishments.
The Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee made
recommendations that culminated in GRRC's approval ofR18-9-501,
otherwise known as the Surface Water Quality General Grazing Permit.
The committee has finished its work.
III. An identification ofany other agencies having similar, conflicting or
duplicate objectives, and an explanation of the manner in which the agency
avoids duplication or conflict with other such agencies.
No conflicts appear to exist.
IV. An assessment of the consequences of eliminating the agency or of
consolidating it with another agency.
The Legislature should eliminate this committee since its work is complete. If
additional issues should arise, ADEQ has an extensive stakeholder process at
which the cattle industry can bring whomever they like to advocate for their
concerns. ADEQ contemplates no substantive rule changes on these issues in the
foreseeable future. If, however, changes are needed, the agency would use its
stakeholder process to bring together affected parties for their input and expertise.
Attachment 3
Interim agendas can be obtained via the Internet at http://www.azleg.state.az.us/lnterimCommittees.asp
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
INTERIM MEETING NOTICE
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND RURAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES NATURAL RESOURCES AND AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE OF
REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Date:
Time:
Place:
Friday, September 1, 2006
2:00 P.M.
HHR3
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Opening Remarks
3. Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee
• Presentation
• Public Testimony
• Discussion
• Recommendations by the Committee of Reference
4. Agricultural Best Management Practices Advisory Committees
• Presentation
• Public Testimony
• Discussion
• Recommendations by the Committee of Reference
5. Adjourn
Members:
Senator Jake Flake, Co-Chair
Senator Marsha Arzberger
Senator Tim Bee
Senator Robert Blendu
Senator Robert Cannell
8/25/06
jmb
Representative Russ Jones, Co-Chair
Representative Cheryl Chase
Representative Ann Kirkpatrick
Representative Tom O'Halleran
Representative Kyrsten Sinema
People with disabilities may request reasonable accommodations such as interpreters,
alternative formats, or assistance with physical accessibility. If you require accommodations,
please contact the Chief Clerk's Office at (602) 926-3032, TOO (602) 926-3241.
Page 1 of 1
Attachment 4
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
Forty-seventh Legislature - Second Regular Session
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND RURAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES NATURAL RESOURCES AND AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE
OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Minutes of Meeting
Friday, September 1,2006
House Hearing Room 3 -- 2:00 p.m.
CoChairman Jones called the meeting to order at 2:07 p.m. and attendance was noted by the
secretary.
Members Present
Senator Tim Bee
Senator Robert Blendu
Senator Robert Cannell
Representative Cheryl Chase
Senator Marsha Arzberger
Representative Ann Kirkpatrick
Representative Kyrsten Sinema
Senator Jake Flake, Co-Chair
Representative Russ Jones, CoChair
Members Absent
Representative Tom O'Halleran
Speakers Present
Kathi Knox, Majority Research Analyst
Jim Buster, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
Shelly A. Tunis, Legislative Liaison, Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association
Rick Lavis, Vice-President, Arizona Cotton Growers
Bas Aja, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Cattlemen's Association
CoChairman Jones thanked everyone for their patience and perseverance since the last meeting
which was short a quorum. Good use was made of the time since then as a stakeholders' meeting
was held which produced some good ideas. Testimony will be heard by two different individuals
today.
Kathi Knox, Majority Research Analyst, stated that the sunset review process is an evaluation
tool used to determine if agencies should be continued. Every agency or commission is required
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENTPRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1,2006
to go through a review at least every ten years. Sunset reviews are based on a sunset audit
prepared by the Auditor General's office, or, as in this instance, the committee of reference
(COR). The COR is required to submit a sunset committee review report containing
recommendations. The legislative staff will then prepare legislation if continuation is
recommended and draft a report. The legislation would be introduced in the 2007 session to
continue the agencies beyond the termination date of July 1,2007.
Jim Buster, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), stated
that, since the agencies have not met for a while, the position of ADEQ is not to continue the
agencies. In speaking to some of the members and stakeholders, such as Bas Aja, while waiting
for a quorum last week, a compromise was reached to collapse the two committees into one.
Mr. Buster believes they have the compromise to bring together the effective stakeholders, the
regulators and industry members. He recommended Bas Aja and C.B. "Doc" Lane for the
advisory committee. No major changes are foreseen in the near future, In terms of nitrogen
application, the final report was made in 1998 and those issues are not surfacing. He noted that
Joan Card, Director, Water Quality Division, is present to answer questions (Attachments 1
and 2).
CoChairman Jones mentioned that staggered terms were originally established so all the
knowledge and experience of the committee is not lost at the same time. He is not sure that is in
the draft and asked if it is a good idea to include staggered terms. Mr. Buster said the
stakeholders are not adamant on that issue and did not include staggered terms. The committees
have not met in a while. The requirement for a certain number of Republicans and Democrats
was removed because it is difficult to fill those positions. The new committee may not meet in
the next five years and and perhaps a sunset of five years is needed as Mr Aja suggested;
however, even though staggered terms is a good idea, he does not believe it is necessary in this
case.
Senator Blendu asked why both committees should not be sunset if the committee that will be
established will not meet in the foreseeable future.
Senator Flake answered that the Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory Committee was
established about eight years ago because of strong objections he had with a ruling by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). At that time meetings were being held around the state
about nitrogen in the ground due to cattle grazing. He attended a meeting in Flagstaff where he
heard things he could not believe. It was almost to the point that in order to comply with the
regulations, the cattle would have to be diapered. He did not say anything in the meeting but
spoke later with the Director of ADEQ who did not know the substance ofthe meetings. Because
of the ridiculous things that were said, the Grazing Best Management Practices Advisory
Committee was formed so everything would have to go through the committee. Senator Flake
said there does not seem to be anything on the horizon at present, but with EPA something could
come up any time. He believes it is important to retain the committee in order to counteract these
types of problems, and he believes it can be of assistance to ADEQ.
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
2
Senator Blendu said he would like to have this explanation on record so these kinds of policies
come through the Legislature as opposed to a fiat from an agency. CoChairman Jones agreed. He
said he sees it is more as a contingency committee, and, due to the lengthy time it takes to go
through the rule-making process, there is an advantage in that it is already in place. Hopefully,
the committee will never have to meet, but it will be available to take care of any issues if it is
necessary.
Shelly A. Tunis, Legislative Liaison, Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association, stated that in 1986 the
Legislature decided that nitrogen fertilizer used in farming operations needed to be regulated in
the State of Arizona so Best Management Practices (BMP) was adopted. Also, in 1986 the
Legislature created ADEQ. One of the reasons the Legislature created best management
practices on nitrogen fertilizer was because there was no experience of what ADEQ would do
since it did not previously exist. Now, 20 years later, it is known what ADEQ does with nitrogen
fertilizer (Attachment 3). ADEQ has not changed the rules since 1991. There is no outcry from
the public or industry to change these rules which seem to be working, and, in the interim, the
Legislature adopted a procedure with more input from stakeholders in the rule-making process.
All that leads to the conclusion that issues related to nitrogen fertilizer and best management
practices in farming operations have been settled and stakeholders have had enough input in the
ADEQ process over the past couple of years. For that reason, the Yuma Fresh Vegetable
Association supports the sunset of the Agricultural Best Management Practices Advisory
Commitees.
Mr. Jones asked Ms. Tunis' opinion about melding the two committees. Ms. Tunis stated she has
no opinion about the part relating to cattle. Senator Flake asked if it would provide the necessary
protection even though it is a larger committee with representations of the livestock industry and
agriculture. Ms. Tunis said she understands there are no agricultural people on the draft
committee, only livestock personnel.
Rick Lavis, Vice-President, Arizona Cotton Growers Association, stated he is present to second
the positions stated, especially Senator Flake's position. This is the first time in 25 years he can
remember being in favor of a sunset, and, in this case, it is absolutely justifiable. He was here
when the 1986 act was passed which was done for a number of reasons. The environmental
community believed farmers were using an excessive amount of nitrogen fertilizers on crops and
could be polluting groundwater. The possibility of producing "blue babies" was brought out in
the legislative process resulting in the creation of the BMPs and the request to create a statutory
reference on these issues. The issue before this committee is not nitrogen fertilizer, but whether
the structure created in 1986 is still appropriate. Mr. Lavis said he does not believe so, and
therefore, supports the sunsetting of the Agricultural Best Management Practices Advisory
Committee. The Legislature required in statute that rules be produced on nitrogen fertilizer. As
an issue for groundwater contamination, he referred to a report produced in 1991 by the
University of Arizona and read the following into the record.
"The spatial distribution of the wells testing above the 10 mg standard does not
present any clear association with human activities which may be responsible for
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEA~TNG OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENTPRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
3
these elevated nitrate levels. Intensive agricultural areas, as well as with locations
with no agriculture at all, have shown elevated nitrate levels in well water."
"Contributions of nitrates can come from multiple sources, including mineralized soil,
organic matter, geological deposits, septic tanks, sewage-treatment plants,
concentrated animal operations, and agricultural applications of nitrogen fertilizer."
He stated that the conclusion of the report is that it is almost impossible to find where those
intensive nitrates might be.
Mr. Lavis continued by saying that the last issue was the "blue babies." The presence of
excessive nitrates in drinking water is the most serious for bottled-fed infants less than 6 months
old whose immature digestive systems are unable to properly metabolize nitrates. Bacteria in an
infant's stomach converts nitrates to nitrites that react with hemoglobin to form methemoglobin,
a condition referred to as methaemoglobinaemia. This molecule is unable to carry oxygen, so
symptoms of oxygen starvation begin to occur. Because oxygen starvation causes a bluish
discoloration of the body, it is commonly referred to as "blue baby disease" which is potentially
fatal but very easy to treat if diagnosed. The number of incidences is very difficult to determine
because it is not a disease that is routinely reported to public health agencies. As of the date of
the 1991 report no confirmed cases resulting from agriculture contamination were reported in
Arizona.
Mr. Lavis said maybe the 1986 act was ahead of the realities because nothing has been seen since
and ADEQ has not raised the issue. There have also been no reported instances by the public
health system. He believes it is unnecessary to have a BMP committee in place as there are other
structures to handle any cases should they occur.
Senator Cannell said it seems that the main argument is there are other methods to deal with this.
One could get to a point technologically where nitrogen could be traced to the source, whether
from farming or elsewhere. Mr. Lavis said that the most important thing is that it is not related
directly to agriculture.
Bas Aja, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Cattlemen's Association, said he supports the sunset of the
nitrogen fertilizer committee and combination of the other two (Attachment 4). Regarding Mr.
Lavis' testimony about the "blue baby" syndrome, etc. and how things have changed, the most
important regulation he has seen relating to nitrogen fertilizer came about because of a very
tragic incident, the Oklahoma City bombing. Now it is important to trace fertilizer to where it is
being used and who has it. It is also being used to produce electricity and methane, and the
Japanese have even produced gasoline from manure. There are still a few federal laws coming
down the pike so he would like to see a committee in place in case the state has to address some
federal rules.
Mr. Aja said he would also be remiss if he did not thank the ADEQ for working with the
stakeholders.
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARlNG OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRlCULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
4
Senator Flake asked his opinion as to five-year terms versus the ten-years. He believes five years
works.
CoChairman Jones asked if there is any reason to include staggered terms if the committee
recommends a five-year continuation. Mr. Aja answered that it would probably be better to have
continuity, so 5-year terms would be fine in this case. If 10 years was recommended, there
should be some staggering.
Senator Flake moved the adoption of the proposed language that was
distributed that combines the best management practices issues relating to
livestock, into Q!!!; advisory committee instead of two. This would be for a
period of 5 years and provide for staggered terms for committee members
and allow any current members to complete their terms. The motion carried.
Senator Flake moved the reconsideration of the above motion. The motion
carried.
Senator Flake moved the adoption of the proposed language that was
distributed that combines the best management practices issues relating to
livestock, into Q.!!.!; advisory committee instead of two. This would be for a
period of five years. The motion carried.
Senator Flake moved that the Nitrogen Fertilizer Best Management Practices
Advisory Committee be allowed to terminate. The motion carried.
The CoChairman instructed staff to prepare legislation to make these changes and draft the COR
report for next session.
Without objection, the meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
Pat Hudock, Committee Secretary
September 7, 2006
(Original minutes, attachments and tape on file in the Office of the Chief Clerk)
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF:
GRAZING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADVISORY COMMITTEES
September 1, 2006
5